Re: Has, or will contemporary SF ever produce a work that is accepted by the literati of the future as a classic?

On 2008-07-29 22:45:01 -0700, Butch Malahide <fred.galvin@xxxxxxxxx> said:

On Jul 29, 2:57 pm, Kurt Busiek <k...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Tolkein may not have written for the pulps, but he was a fantasy
author.  He wrote fantasy.  He was aware of it, he was aware of the
traditions he was working in, and it didn't come as a surprise to him
that there were elves and dwarves and myth and magic in his books.  He
was a fantasist.  Your definition of "genre fantasy" notwithstanding,
the bulk of his work is solidly within the genre of fantasy.

That he did not write for the pulp audience is irrelevant -- what he
wrote was fantasy, and he certainly qualifies as one of "our favourite
authors" (taking "our" as referring the the group as a whole) and even
as a "Sci fi author" (provided the term is used to encompass fantasy as
well as SF).

And, as such, deserves to have his name spelled right? Tolkien. I
before E.

Yeah, someday I'll get the hang of it.

Annoying, though, that I can't get it right when that same vowel combination appears in my own name.

Sorta like when I found I'd been consistently mispronouncing that part of John Buscema's name that's identical to my own...

kdb

.

Relevant Pages